Karma vs. Law of Attraction

[Gopal]

Feb 22, 2024 7:06:23 GMT -5 lolly said:

It's strange, because in all my narrative, there was no deliberate creation theory. Rather, it's a discussion about volition and the cessation thereof. Caveat being the more sublime notion of metta or goodwill. Of course volitions are exerted in dreams just as in wakefulness. In a more expansive sense, the universe runs on karmic law (it's a mind/matter thing), while the theory extends beyond mind and matter and indeed details the cessation of karma (volition) itself. It's just karma theory has been developing since prehistory and LOA theory is the most recent retelling. It's simply a revised lexicon.

We have a parable about many sided crystal. A very close view gives detail of one small facet, while a very far view has no detail, but covers the whole thing. If you have looked at all the facets closely, and then you take the far view, you understand how the tiny details together make up the entire crystal.

Actually, Reefs hasn't understood this properly. But that's okay.

To clarify, the process isn't about actively creating something. When an individual chooses to embark on the creation journey, they utilize techniques like visualization and affirmations. However, it's essential to note that this isn't about bringing something into existence; instead, it signifies that the creation has already set in motion towards the desired reality. As one envisions that reality, it is already happening in their focus.  Essentially, we aren't initiating creation; we are already part of the ongoing flow.

[Reefs]

Feb 22, 2024 7:06:23 GMT -5 lolly said:

It's strange, because in all my narrative, there was no deliberate creation theory. Rather, it's a discussion about volition and the cessation thereof. Caveat being the more sublime notion of metta or goodwill. Of course volitions are exerted in dreams just as in wakefulness. In a more expansive sense, the universe runs on karmic law (it's a mind/matter thing), while the theory extends beyond mind and matter and indeed details the cessation of karma (volition) itself. It's just karma theory has been developing since prehistory and LOA theory is the most recent retelling. It's simply a revised lexicon.

We have a parable about many sided crystal. A very close view gives detail of one small facet, while a very far view has no detail, but covers the whole thing. If you have looked at all the facets closely, and then you take the far view, you understand how the tiny details together make up the entire crystal.

Volition assumes doership. Doership assumes a doer. A doer is the personal context. Therefore, as soon as you bring volition into the mix, you are automatically talking in the deliberate creation context. Which is why you keep confusing LOA with deliberate creation. And then, of course, you don't see the difference to LOK, because LOK is all about deliberate creation. And the universe is not run on LOK, because the universe is not run by a personal creator. So, there is no self and there is no personal creator. It's all pure impersonal functioning. Which means, there's no basis for LOK, but there is for LOA. Surely a Buddhist can understand that? It's Buddhism 101.

[Reefs]

Feb 22, 2024 7:27:57 GMT -5 Gopal said:

Feb 22, 2024 7:06:23 GMT -5 lolly said:

It's strange, because in all my narrative, there was no deliberate creation theory. Rather, it's a discussion about volition and the cessation thereof. Caveat being the more sublime notion of metta or goodwill. Of course volitions are exerted in dreams just as in wakefulness. In a more expansive sense, the universe runs on karmic law (it's a mind/matter thing), while the theory extends beyond mind and matter and indeed details the cessation of karma (volition) itself. It's just karma theory has been developing since prehistory and LOA theory is the most recent retelling. It's simply a revised lexicon.

We have a parable about many sided crystal. A very close view gives detail of one small facet, while a very far view has no detail, but covers the whole thing. If you have looked at all the facets closely, and then you take the far view, you understand how the tiny details together make up the entire crystal.

Actually, Reefs hasn't understood this properly. But that's okay.

To clarify, the process isn't about actively creating something. When an individual chooses to embark on the creation journey, they utilize techniques like visualization and affirmations. However, it's essential to note that this isn't about bringing something into existence; instead, it signifies that the creation has already set in motion towards the desired reality. As one envisions that reality, it is already happening in their focus.  Essentially, we aren't initiating creation; we are already part of the ongoing flow.

That is correct.

[laughter]

Feb 19, 2024 6:57:01 GMT -5 Reefs said:

Feb 19, 2024 0:27:16 GMT -5 lolly said:

Tru dat. The entire shemozzle is not even there.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yoga_Sutras_of_Patanjali

It's a treatise on yoga. In the later chapters he goes into the mechanics of siddhis (supernatural powers), which is basically identical to what I have said here about the mechanics of miracles.

So, what you are saying, would go against Patanjali and the yoga tradition.

Emptiness is the anti-materialist pointing. The brown bears are not wrong, after all.

[laughter]

Feb 19, 2024 11:52:16 GMT -5 Reefs said:

Feb 19, 2024 9:04:42 GMT -5 laughter said:

Not to re-join the debate, but what you wrote here suggests a belief that I can understand and embrace, which isn't what you stated, but can be read into it: the focus on a manifestation, in this case, a better body, can result in these other results that can seem tangential to the focus, in this case, diet, exercise and sleep. Certainly, the metal aspects of this go far beyond a "good attitude", and in ways that a materialist perspective are going to miss.

In a sense, in the end, it's back to what ZD keeps saying, that THIS is mysterious and that no one knows how to grow a hair or a tooth and yet it happens. Or as Abe say, the same energy that keeps this earth spinning in its orbit is also running thru your veins and keeps your heart pumping. There's no need to micromanage. I mean, how could we? This would be my only point of disagreement with Patanjali. All this stuff we talk about here, nutrition, exercise, attitude, beliefs and even focus all fall into the micromanaging category. However, as Abe teach, all you need to know is that your natural state is one of total well-being, and that good feels good and bad feels bad and that it therefore takes no effort to be well. This is very difficult for people to grasp. So you don't need to know about nutrition and exercises etc. in order to stay healthy, all you need to know is about total alignment and the rest follows automatically. The Moorjani case is the best example for that. So you could say, the less people are aware of their connection to THIS and the less trust they have into the infinite intelligence of THIS, the more they are concerned with micromanaging their lives. That's why Anita's doctors couldn't see the truth even when it sat right before their faces and was staring them in their eyes. People who are overly concerned with practice and right action and right behavior and right attitude also fall into that category. They can't see the forest for the trees. And so whatever action they take, whatever decision they make from that state of confusion, will only compound that confusion. As Anita put it, just drop it, suspend it all, and you're there, immediately, because it's here, always here and now as RM likes to say.

I've overheard elsewhere that there's a bible verse that says something along the lines about mistaking good for evil and vice-versa. If you take the moralism out of it you could re-phrase it as "mistaking what feels good for what feels bad and mistaking what feels bad for what feels good". Do you see how the sort of meditation suggested by lolz can reveal that?

[Reefs]

Feb 22, 2024 10:30:30 GMT -5 laughter said:

Feb 19, 2024 6:57:01 GMT -5 Reefs said:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yoga_Sutras_of_Patanjali

It's a treatise on yoga. In the later chapters he goes into the mechanics of siddhis (supernatural powers), which is basically identical to what I have said here about the mechanics of miracles.

So, what you are saying, would go against Patanjali and the yoga tradition.

Emptiness is the anti-materialist pointing. The brown bears are not wrong, after all.

They are not wrong. But they aren't entirely correct either.

[Reefs]

Feb 22, 2024 11:24:31 GMT -5 laughter said:

Feb 19, 2024 11:52:16 GMT -5 Reefs said:

In a sense, in the end, it's back to what ZD keeps saying, that THIS is mysterious and that no one knows how to grow a hair or a tooth and yet it happens. Or as Abe say, the same energy that keeps this earth spinning in its orbit is also running thru your veins and keeps your heart pumping. There's no need to micromanage. I mean, how could we? This would be my only point of disagreement with Patanjali. All this stuff we talk about here, nutrition, exercise, attitude, beliefs and even focus all fall into the micromanaging category. However, as Abe teach, all you need to know is that your natural state is one of total well-being, and that good feels good and bad feels bad and that it therefore takes no effort to be well. This is very difficult for people to grasp. So you don't need to know about nutrition and exercises etc. in order to stay healthy, all you need to know is about total alignment and the rest follows automatically. The Moorjani case is the best example for that. So you could say, the less people are aware of their connection to THIS and the less trust they have into the infinite intelligence of THIS, the more they are concerned with micromanaging their lives. That's why Anita's doctors couldn't see the truth even when it sat right before their faces and was staring them in their eyes. People who are overly concerned with practice and right action and right behavior and right attitude also fall into that category. They can't see the forest for the trees. And so whatever action they take, whatever decision they make from that state of confusion, will only compound that confusion. As Anita put it, just drop it, suspend it all, and you're there, immediately, because it's here, always here and now as RM likes to say.

I've overheard elsewhere that there's a bible verse that says something along the lines about mistaking good for evil and vice-versa. If you take the moralism out of it you could re-phrase it as "mistaking what feels good for what feels bad and mistaking what feels bad for what feels good". Do you see how the sort of meditation suggested by lolz can reveal that?

Just read a bit further in this thread and you'll see that Lolly and I are pretty much in alignment on the alignment topic. Our only disagreement is on the karma topic and the witness perspective. From the witness perspective, as I use that term, SVP and also karma are seen as a fiction. So you wouldn't come away with the conclusion that you should work on your reactivity in order to reduce your karma load. That would be illogical. But that is what I hear Lolly saying. So what he refers to as the witness perspective, can only be what I call the false witness perspective, i.e. a different level of identity poker, a broader and more expansive personal perspective, but not the impersonal perspective, which would be the true witness perspective. And then there's our disagreement about LOA not being LOK, but at this point, the argument is beyond silly. But in the scope of things discussed, that's not really important. What is more important is the anatta vs. karma dilemma in the Buddhist doctrine and how Lolly resolves it. So this is where I question his 'sort of meditation'.

[laughter]

Feb 19, 2024 21:52:05 GMT -5 Reefs said:

Feb 19, 2024 17:00:21 GMT -5 lolly said:

I doubt what you are saying is true, and I think it's probably baiting, but I don't know anything about Pantanjali or supernatural powers, and I don't want to take the bait, but I believe in miracles, so maybe we're on the same page.

Well, do you doubt the JC miracle stories too? If you do, then fine, at least you're being consistent. And I will respect that. 

In case you don't believe it, how would you explain stigmata and events of bilocation by contemporary saints?


Here's from Patanjali, I'm sure you can relate to at least some degree:

(from book 3, on divine powers aka siddhis):

3.1 One-pointedness is steadfastness of the mind.

3.2 Unbroken continuation of that mental ability is meditation.

3.3 That same meditation when there is only consciousness of the object of meditation and not of the mind is realization.

3.4 The three appearing together are self-control.

3.5 By mastery comes wisdom.

3.6 The application of mastery is by stages.

3.7 The three are more efficacious than the restraints.

3.8 Even that is external to the seedless realization.

3.9 The significant aspect is the union of the mind with the moment of absorption, when the outgoing thought disappears and the absorptive experience appears.

3.10 From sublimation of this union comes the peaceful flow of unbroken unitive cognition.

3.11 The contemplative transformation of this is equalmindedness, witnessing the rise and destruction of distraction as well as one-pointedness itself.

3.12 The mind becomes one-pointed when the subsiding and rising thought-waves are exactly similar.

3.13 In this state, it passes beyond the changes of inherent characteristics, properties and the conditional modifications of object or sensory recognition.

3.14 The object is that which preserves the latent characteristic, the rising characteristic or the yet-to-be-named characteristic that establishes one entity as specific.

3.15 The succession of these changes in that entity is the cause of its modification.

3.16 By self-control over these three-fold changes (of property, character and condition), knowledge of the past and the future arises.

3.17 The sound of a word, the idea behind the word, and the object the idea signfies are often taken as being one thing and may be mistaken for one another. By self-control over their distinctions, understanding of all languages of all creatures arises.

3.18 By self-control on the perception of mental impressions, knowledge of previous lives arises.

3.19 By self-control on any mark of a body, the wisdom of the mind activating that body arises.

3.20 By self-control on the form of a body, by suspending perceptibility and separating effulgence therefrom, there arises invisibility and inaudibilty.

3.21 Action is of two kinds, dormant and fruitful. By self-control on such action, one portends the time of death.

3.22 By performing self-control on friendliness, the strength to grant joy arises.

3.23 By self-control over any kind of strength, such as that of the elephant, that very strength arises.

3.24 By self-control on the primal activator comes knowledge of the hidden, the subtle, and the distant.

3.25 By self-control on the Sun comes knowledge of spatial specificities.

3.26 By self-control on the Moon comes knowledge of the heavens.

3.27 By self-control on the Polestar arises knowledge of orbits.

3.28 By self-control on the navel arises knowledge of the constitution of the body.

3.29 By self-control on the pit of the throat one subdues hunger and thirst.

3.30 By self-control on the tube within the chest one acquires absolute steadiness.

3.31 By self-control on the light in the head one envisions perfected beings.

3.32 There is knowledge of everything from intuition.

3.33 Self-control on the heart brings knowledge of the mental entity.

3.34 Experience arises due to the inability of discerning the attributes of vitality from the indweller, even though they are indeed distinct from one another. Self-control brings true knowledge of the indweller by itself.

3.35 This spontaneous enlightenment results in intuitional perception of hearing, touching, seeing and smelling.

3.36 To the outward turned mind, the sensory organs are perfections, but are obstacles to realization.

3.37 When the bonds of the mind caused by action have been loosened, one may enter the body of another by knowledge of how the nerve-currents function.

3.38 By self-control of the nerve-currents utilising the lifebreath, one may levitate, walk on water, swamps, thorns, or the like.

3.39 By self-control over the maintenance of breath, one may radiate light.

3.40 By self-control on the relation of the ear to the ether one gains distant hearing.

3.41 By self-control over the relation of the body to the ether, and maintaining at the same time the thought of the lightness of cotton, one is able to pass through space.

3.42 By self-control on the mind when it is separated from the body- the state known as the Great Transcorporeal- all coverings are removed from the Light.

3.43 Mastery over the elements arises when their gross and subtle forms,as well as their essential characteristics, and the inherent attributes and experiences they produce, is examined in self-control.

3.44 Thereby one may become as tiny as an atom as well as having many other abilities, such as perfection of the body, and non-resistence to duty.

3.45 Perfection of the body consists in beauty, grace, strength and adamantine hardness.

3.46 By self-control on the changes that the sense-organs endure when contacting objects, and on the power of the sense of identity, and of the influence of the attributes, and the experience all these produce- one masters the senses.

3.47 From that come swiftness of mind, independence of perception, and mastery over primoridal matter.

3.48 To one who recognizes the distinctive relation between vitality and indweller comes omnipotence and omniscience.

3.49 Even for the destruction of the seed of bondage by desirelessness there comes absolute independence.

3.50 When invited by invisible beings one should be neither flattered nor satisfied, for there is yet a possibility of ignorance rising up.

3.51 By self-control over single moments and their succession there is wisdom born of discrimination.

3.52 From that there is recognition of two similars when that difference cannot be distinguished by class, characteristic or position.

3.53 Intuition, which is the entire discriminative knowledge, relates to all objects at all times, and is without succession.

3.54 Liberation is attained when there is equal purity between vitality and the indweller.

Now, this is all presented in a very logical, even scientific way. And if you read verse 3.38, then you'll see the JC connection. And JC is often seen as a yogi or avatar.  And avatars are said to have total conscious control over all their physical aspects of their beingness. And Patanjali explains how that is.

In a sense, this is some kind of higher alchemy, not that different from the destruction of karma alchemy that you tend to described. You are just not aware of the greater implications, it seems.

However, people like RM usually discourage their followers from following that route, because it is based on the misconception of being a self and therefore those practices are only reinforcing that false sense of self and cannot lead to liberation.

The meditations described by lolz and Pants' have much in common. I've written a story on here about a synch that involves the JC story and my thoughts on miracles (my take on it ultimately, is amusement). One of the objections to you presentation on the topic are based on that there are many charlatans that mimic what Pants is suggesting to fool people. One example is the walking on thorns or hot coals. There are rational explanations for those abilities. I find all of that blurred matters-of-degree along various spectra. My mind is open, although I understand the closed minds.

[laughter]

Feb 22, 2024 12:13:29 GMT -5 Reefs said:

Feb 22, 2024 10:30:30 GMT -5 laughter said:

Emptiness is the anti-materialist pointing. The brown bears are not wrong, after all.

They are not wrong. But they aren't entirely correct either.

(** muttley snicker **)

[laughter]

Feb 19, 2024 21:56:20 GMT -5 DonHelado said:

Lots of abstract babbling, theories, and book-knowledge, second and third-hand stories. In contrast, people who are grounded in Reality tell stories from their actual lives and first-hand experience. But that's too humbling for people who've invested years building a giant edifice of imaginary ideas, and mistaking that for spiritual progress.

So, I'm going to reply to this for a very specific purpose, and if you respond I'll take it private. The purpose is to explain why I didn't respond to similar posts you made (except once). It's because you seem to be expressing a measure of contempt. I don't think I'm projecting it, but I do think that I understand where that's coming from. Anyways, as reefs suggested, the reason there was minimal engagement with these is because the dialog on this forum went through a dip in quality over a few years, that I was definitely partially responsible for. It has since elevated quite a bit. Please don't take this as a personal attack, although I really can't blame you if you do, because as I just said, I think I understand where you're coming from.

As far as kidding around, that's entirely situational. Specific to the individual, your "relationship" to them, and also the context.

[laughter]

Feb 19, 2024 23:39:52 GMT -5 Reefs said:

Feb 19, 2024 22:50:21 GMT -5 DonHelado said:

I've had some interesting exchanges with several people here; I don't feel ignored.

I don't know what "giraffe herding" means. I might know what you mean by "crusading", but who cares? It seems like there are many thousands of posts from people repeating themselves, and telling others they are wrong. Is that not one of the games? 

I don't know who Robertk or Robertc is. I thought this was all virtual, and I don't know anybody here in real life. But now I see "Zendancer" has a real-life identity. 

So you are Sree then? I thought you promised to not come back in case you should get banned. And I'm pretty sure I've explained to you giraffes and crusades before.

Alrighty then, just make sure that you actually understand the topic at hand and also address the actual points people make instead of reading things into posts that are just not there (giraffe herding) and then going to war with them following your own private agenda (crusading).

His disclaimer of sree is fishy.

[laughter]

Feb 19, 2024 12:43:03 GMT -5 Reefs said:

Feb 19, 2024 9:19:01 GMT -5 laughter said:

precious! Now, as to QM: QM is impersonal, and is expressed from an objective foundation. What it had to shed from that foundation is determinism, which is replaced by a stochastic model (which, no, is not "random" in the truest sense of that word). Spiritualists wander off into solipsism when they start making assumptions about the question "what is the QM observer?". The conclusion that the entire Universe is alive at "the atomic level" is sort of suggested, even by Heisenberg (but only in writing on a metaphysical tangent, and I'm not sure about Bohr), but never embraced explicitly. Later commentators in the field, like the ones zd has mentioned over time, have gotten more explicit on the topic, and I haven't taken the time to read the material to see if they're making the same mistake, as say a Chopra, or, as it would seem from here, Spira.

I'm very much on board with most of what you say about health and healing from a Source perspective, except for one particular point. Change, is nothing but time, and time, is nothing but change, so this idea of immediate manifestation is one that I reserve any judgment on for now. I don't disagree with the point that "creative potential is only ever Now", butt,  the applicable tenkautology is: "it takes time to manifest whatever it takes time to manifest".

Interesting observation. I often see people using QM as proof for LOA being legit and scientific, but I don't think it's that simple. And Seth is not a solipsist, if that's your concern. Seth has this concept of CU's, units of consciousness, as the smallest building blocks of this or any universe. So you could take this as some kind of basic, objective reality. He also talks about 'vitality', something that we would call life force, and once described the physical world as 'solidified vitality'. And that's a rather clever and also poetic of way of expression that pretty much nails it, IMO. And speaking of nails, Seth's quote about the nail on the window sill is what kicked off our perpetual aliveness debate, hehe...

Seth: Ruburt once wrote a poem about a nail on a window sill. He endowed the nail with consciousness and self‐awareness. Now every nail is indeed in its own way responsive to stimuli. It acts and reacts. A nail may not choose to jump down from a window still and dance about the room, but a nail is indeed aware of the room, of the window sill, and aware of the temperature on both sides of the window. The atoms and molecules that compose the nail possess their own lively consciousnesses. Their motion is directed by electrons, so that within itself the nail actually experiences constant motion. Indeed, a dance is executed of great symmetry and rhythm. The nail, then, is indeed filled with its own sense of self‐approval. I am mentioning this only to stress the fact that self‐delight and self‐ approval are natural characteristics — characteristics that actually make your entire physical world, and world of experience, possible.

That's basically the lila perspective, the world as the divine play of God. Watts was a big promoter of that, but also Niz and especially Ramakrishna, even Ramana used it extensively. 

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lila_(Hinduism)

As for instant manifestations, Seth would explain it by jumping timelines maybe, and Abe by referring to the Vortex (quantum field?), where it already exists, but (in Abe terms) your senses cannot see it yet, or (in Seth terms) your senses haven't constructed it yet, or (in QM terms) ____ [fill in the blank].

Alignment, in this context, is the "self-approval" of all of the other atoms within your perception sharing in your "self-approval".

[laughter]

Feb 20, 2024 1:56:56 GMT -5 Reefs said:

Feb 19, 2024 9:19:01 GMT -5 laughter said:

I'm very much on board with most of what you say about health and healing from a Source perspective, except for one particular point. Change, is nothing but time, and time, is nothing but change, so this idea of immediate manifestation is one that I reserve any judgment on for now. I don't disagree with the point that "creative potential is only ever Now", butt,  the applicable tenkautology is: "it takes time to manifest whatever it takes time to manifest".

As a first step you could pay attention to the instant manifestations that already happen in your life all the time all day long, like feeling thirsty and reaching for a bottle of water and quenching your thirst instantly, or being out of water and getting some more in the store next door, instantly. Those are all more or less instant manifestations, where your beliefs and expectations match your desire perfectly, so it happens effortlessly but you usually don't notice it as such, exactly because it happens so effortlessly and naturally. People usually look for the big things when they look for miracles, but it's actually in the little things where you can find it more frequently. 

So, I noticed the experience what you're describing in the months that involved the sudden disappearance of the imposter. A very blissful time. No surprise that this leads to much less moment-by-moment resistance. That never completely went away, and as we discussed once years ago "you can only go through the gateless gate but once".

But notice how in each these descriptions of instantaneous manifestation, you have to resort to the description of a process.

[laughter]

Feb 20, 2024 3:02:54 GMT -5 DonHelado said:

I stayed for the comedy.

[laughter]

Feb 20, 2024 11:45:11 GMT -5 DonHelado said:

Feb 20, 2024 5:00:08 GMT -5 Reefs said:

I didn't say anything about other religions. 

I am just replying to your posts, and in kind.

I am not admin.

I didn't say SR is an intellectual conclusion.

If you don't understand Seth at all, then you don't understand the argument at hand.

Again, I didn't say anything about religion.

Now, do you see how your replies have little to nothing to do with my posts? This is what I meant that you should try to get a coherent argument together for a change, and respond to what has actually been said, instead of making stuff up and then responding to your own fictions. Or else there's nothing of substance for me to reply to. Your choice.

I mean religion in the general sense. I could have said "spiritual ideas" or "spiritual beliefs".


About pointless beliefs "getting in the way" of SR : sure, there are no hard rules on these matters. But there is plenty of good teaching and experience on this. Even the Bible verse hints at it - about how it is hard for a "rich man" to enter the "Kingdom of Heaven". 

Your style of "argument", like your belief system, is not something I have any interest in. So I'll leave alone these discussions about LOA, psychic channelers, quantum healing, etc. 

What is realized is an absence, and several of the members here will often describe a process of knowledge and attachments falling away over time, rather than some sort of "accumulation of knowledge". I've seen zd quip along the lines of "oh yeah, I'm the biggest loser here!"